I don't see the switch happening. Management likes the 3-4 because it is easier/ cheaper to find 8 LB's than it is to find 8 DL. The 3-4 is arguably better for special teams also because you have more LB's instead of DL available.

Then there is our current roster. CM3 is a special player in the 3-4. In the 4-3, he would be wasted. Much like Aaron Kampman was in the transition the other way. The difference is CM3>>>>> Kampy. So why would you make a change that essentially nullifies your best player? It would be like installing the Wildcat on Offense. If you take Aaron Rodgers away from the ball, the other team wins. Putting Matthews as a 4-3 LB would be to the advantage of the Bears, Lions, etc.

But I've been wrong before. Lots. More than anyone else, I bet. Just ask my wife.

Hey, I was looking up some switch history articles earlier, one on NE's switch to a 4-3, and some commentary about what GB might expect in doing the same. Author had exact same response regarding Matthews. I just do not see it quite like the Kampman thing at all. Matthews is great in coverage. He's also adept at blowing up running plays. But, I do see an advantage to keeping him as a pass rusher in a 3-4. Matthews is a true LB with awesome pass rush skills. Kampman was a true DE with awesome pass rush skills, but not many of those guys can cover well.

We just need better players at a couple of key positions to shore up our weaknesses.

... and my wife would never tell you that I'm ever wrong... [grin1] ugh. I just hope Perry and Worthy come back healthy, and that we can add the right talent at the right positions.

One of the advantages for years was that most teams ran a 4-3 so there were more 3-4 type players available for the teams that ran it. The year we switched I believe there were 10 or 12 other teams that also switched. Add this to the teams that were running it and the talent pool became somewhat diluted. At least that's a theory of mine. On the other hand the players just keep getting bigger and faster so I'm not sure what effect this has overall.

Hey, I was looking up some switch history articles earlier, one on NE's switch to a 4-3, and some commentary about what GB might expect in doing the same. Author had exact same response regarding Matthews. I just do not see it quite like the Kampman thing at all. Matthews is great in coverage. He's also adept at blowing up running plays. But, I do see an advantage to keeping him as a pass rusher in a 3-4. Matthews is a true LB with awesome pass rush skills. Kampman was a true DE with awesome pass rush skills, but not many of those guys can cover well.

We just need better players at a couple of key positions to shore up our weaknesses.

... and my wife would never tell you that I'm ever wrong... [grin1] ugh. I just hope Perry and Worthy come back healthy, and that we can add the right talent at the right positions.

My analogy with Kampman was in taking arguably the best player in our front 7 and moving him out of his best position to make plays. Kampy was a great 4-3 end. He was a fair (being gentle!) OLB. CM3 is arguably one of the best defensive playmakers in the business. He would be a good OLB in a 4-3. But he is a great OLB in a 3-4. Put your playmakers in a position to make plays.

Different analogy. Would you consider installing a Zone Read offense for AR? No, because every time he would run would be one less time he could pass. He's a top 3 QB in the league. So why change and take him out of his element?

Another thought. Most of us see a need for better DL next year. That's with only filling 6 positions. Imagine what our quality would be like if we had to fill 8? If you can't find 6 good wide bodies, what makes you think we could find 8?

To me, our biggest need is DL, and that depends on the resigning of Pickett. Raji and Pickett should be platooning at the NT position, not playing next to each other, so they can stay fresh. But that would mean Mike Neal needs to stay healthy and take the next step, along with Worthy at the other DE. So I could see us picking up another DE with a high pick, and a developmental NT is definitely needed because Daniels is just not big enough to play the position. I fully expect to see Pickett resigned because I think he wants to be a Packer and will take a little less to stay. There is no such thing as being too stacked on the DL.

To me, our biggest need is DL, and that depends on the resigning of Pickett. Raji and Pickett should be platooning at the NT position, not playing next to each other, so they can stay fresh. But that would mean Mike Neal needs to stay healthy and take the next step, along with Worthy at the other DE. So I could see us picking up another DE with a high pick, and a developmental NT is definitely needed because Daniels is just not big enough to play the position. I fully expect to see Pickett resigned because I think he wants to be a Packer and will take a little less to stay. There is no such thing as being too stacked on the DL.

I don't see the switch happening. Management likes the 3-4 because it is easier/ cheaper to find 8 LB's than it is to find 8 DL. The 3-4 is arguably better for special teams also because you have more LB's instead of DL available.

Then there is our current roster. CM3 is a special player in the 3-4. In the 4-3, he would be wasted. Much like Aaron Kampman was in the transition the other way. The difference is CM3>>>>> Kampy. So why would you make a change that essentially nullifies your best player? It would be like installing the Wildcat on Offense. If you take Aaron Rodgers away from the ball, the other team wins. Putting Matthews as a 4-3 LB would be to the advantage of the Bears, Lions, etc.

But I've been wrong before. Lots. More than anyone else, I bet. Just ask my wife.

While I am not proposing a swith to 4-3. Matthews would not be wasted as a 4-3 LBer. He could make an outstanding MLB in a 4-3. He would be like Urlacher. His pass rush ability would allow him to keep blockers off him in run support, he has the coverage skills and his speed would work good covering sideline to sideline.

While I am not proposing a swith to 4-3. Matthews would not be wasted as a 4-3 LBer. He could make an outstanding MLB in a 4-3. He would be like Urlacher. His pass rush ability would allow him to keep blockers off him in run support, he has the coverage skills and his speed would work good covering sideline to sideline.

He wouldn't be wasted, but not outstanding. Less utilized in his area of excellence.

It would be like Detroit moving Calvin Johnson to safety. Yes, he might be productive there. But why would you do that?

He wouldn't be wasted, but not outstanding. Less utilized in his area of excellence.

It would be like Detroit moving Calvin Johnson to safety. Yes, he might be productive there. But why would you do that?

LOL, it's not even close to being that extreme of a change. CM3 would still be rushing the passer on passing downs exactly as he has been doing since he entered the league, and likely still playing defensive end on some variations of base packages, as well. He would just be utilized in different roles in a creative 4-3 hybrid scheme; sometimes a MLB, sometimes an OLB for a play or two, etc. Make no mistake about it, he would still be the teams best pass rusher, and no defense coordinator worthy of the title would not allow him to rush the passer most of the time.

I agree with the overall premise though that CM3 is ultimately likely best suited for a 3-4 OLB, but I don't think there would be that big of a difference in a 4-3 with the right coach. It's still a completely different scenario than moving Kampman to OLB. Clay already drops into coverage and spies often as it is, and he can rush the QB and play in space at an elite level. Not to mention, it can be argued that almost every other defensive player is either better suited for a hybrid 4-3 style of defense or, at the very least, as suited as they are for a 3-4. The net effect of that could easily be better defensive play around the board.

It doesn't matter though, as this discussion is just an interesting thought experiment. The Packers are sticking with a 3-4 under Dom Capers. I'm fine with that, but I think giving Ray Horton a shot at defensive coordinator would be a "risk" well worth taking.

He wouldn't be wasted, but not outstanding. Less utilized in his area of excellence.

It would be like Detroit moving Calvin Johnson to safety. Yes, he might be productive there. But why would you do that?

What? How the heck do you compare moving a WR to S equally as moving a 3 - 4 OLB to a 4 - 3 DE? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Those are vastly different sets of skills between the two, one striking difference is the requirement to go from breaking tackles to actually making tackles.

Why couldn't Clay Matthews play OLB in a 4 - 3? Why would he have to be switched to a DE? My high level understanding would be he'd benefit from having another guy on the DL which would allow him to unleash on the QB.

What? How the heck do you compare moving a WR to S equally as moving a 3 - 4 OLB to a 4 - 3 DE? That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Those are vastly different sets of skills between the two, one striking difference is the requirement to go from breaking tackles to actually making tackles.

Why couldn't Clay Matthews play OLB in a 4 - 3? Why would he have to be switched to a DE? My high level understanding would be he'd benefit from having another guy on the DL which would allow him to unleash on the QB.

The point is that every team we face would be elated if we made Matthews into a 4-3 LB. Because it would limit his pass rushing. Much like making Johnson a safety would excite every team because it would be taking him away from catching touchdowns.

Let's try again. Does Minny make a habit of splitting AP out wide? No. Why? Well, if he is split out wide, it removes the threat of him running the ball. If the defense doesn't have to defend the run with AP, is their life better? Yes. So by continually splitting him out wide, Minny would help the other team. Lining CM3 up as an outside backer in a 4-3 would be removing him from the role he performs best. Yes, I know he can still blitz. But he would not be rushing the QB as much as he does in a 3-4. It's not possible.

Let's look at the 4-3 for a second. A 4-3 is designed to pressure the QB with the DL. So don't tell me he can still rush the QB a lot, because the defense is designed to not need that. When you blitz in a 4-3 you either rush 5 and depend on 6 to cover which is a risk, or you drop a 290lb lineman into coverage, again, not ideal.

Didn't seem to stop Von Miller a whole lot in his first year with the Broncos.

You can use a LB in a pass rushing role very effectively in a 4-3, as well. It's not like he's always coming on the rush in the 3-4. Maybe the drop back percentage would be a bit higher, but not that crazy.

Don't know why we're having this discusson, though. If there's one thing that doesn't work, it's switching schemes every four years. Don't know why it'd be necessary to go to the 4-3, all of a sudden. Especially since everyone was jumping out of joy when we fired Sanders and went to the 3-4 with Capers.

Didn't seem to stop Von Miller a whole lot in his first year with the Broncos.

You can use a LB in a pass rushing role very effectively in a 4-3, as well. It's not like he's always coming on the rush in the 3-4. Maybe the drop back percentage would be a bit higher, but not that crazy.

Don't know why we're having this discusson, though. If there's one thing that doesn't work, it's switching schemes every four years. Don't know why it'd be necessary to go to the 4-3, all of a sudden. Especially since everyone was jumping out of joy when we fired Sanders and went to the 3-4 with Capers.

As I said earlier, it's just an interesting thought experiment, especially considering how many Packers defensive players currently on the roster seem to be much better suited for a 4-3.

Re: the previous discussion, CM3 would be rushing from a DE/OLB position on obvious passing downs, regardless of whether he was standing or had a hand in the dirt in a 3-4 or 4-3 scheme. The only difference would be is that he would play more of a "rover" role, almost like Charles Woodson has done in the past on 1st and 2nd downs in a 4-3, depending on the situation. And at times, I'm sure he would still line up as a DE in base packages, as well. I wouldn't view that as much of a problem at all, and very well could be a good thing. He already does similar things now, especially against mobile QBs when spying. I'm not sure why some think it would limit his pass rushing opportunities at all, at least with a good coordinator. But as has been said, it's nothing more than something interesting to talk about in a long season, because it's not happening. Hopefully several of these other more prototypical 4-3 can make a better transition to a 3-4 defense next season though. Or better yet, we get more appropriate 3-4 personnel, especially DL and LBs.

All this talk about switching to a 4-3 and wasting CM3's talents is actually funny. You people do realize he was a DE in college right? Thats what he was drafted as and he had to learn the 3-4 scheme. I know we won't switch cuz we are in the same type of years we were in with Favre. You know the ones where we get to the playoffs but then get knocked out.

All this talk about switching to a 4-3 and wasting CM3's talents is actually funny. You people do realize he was a DE in college right? Thats what he was drafted as and he had to learn the 3-4 scheme. I know we won't switch cuz we are in the same type of years we were in with Favre. You know the ones where we get to the playoffs but then get knocked out.

He wasn't, actually. He played the elephant position at USC. Pretty much as stand-up hybrid DE/LB. Very similar what he plays here in Green Bay.

You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.